I like games. Lots of people do. But it's always the innovative, creative, never-been-done-before games that are the most fun. The common games can be addicting, but I wouldn't necessarily say satisfying.
The concept of corporations designing games for people to play sounds like a more organized and centralized version of what they are already doing. My credit cards give me points, the local Japanese fast food restaurant has a frequent buyer program, and grocery stores give me discounts if I agree to give up information about what I eat.
In general, I don't like these games. I am not going to alter my spending habits just to get 250 more BankPoints. If they give me points anyways, I will of course cash them in, but I don't like the feeling of being manipulated by large corporations via a game.
On the other hand, the companies seem to love it. I haven't seen any data, but considering how popular these 'games' are, they must work. And if they work by themselves, imagine how much better they will work when they're consolidated into a a website, which catches on like a fad and all the cool kids use it. Once the cool factor wears off, the industry has already been transformed to run all games on the defacto gaming website (SCVNGR in this case). So there's really no down-side for companies, and customers will think they're getting even better deals than they used to, because now it's just so easy to play games -- rack up points, earn achievements, get discounts.
I don't look forward to the days foretold by Jesse Schell, but it feels inevitable. The people who like playing corporate consumerism games today will be thrilled to take it to the next level on a popular website where companies are constantly trying to drum up more 'fun' (spend more, save more). I'll try it out, like I try out most new tech, but I'm not expecting to have much fun.
At least we know Seth Priebatsch will be having fun.
I like games. Lots of people do. But it's always the innovative, creative, never-been-done-before games that are the most fun. The common games can be addicting, but I wouldn't necessarily say satisfying.
The concept of corporations designing games for people to play sounds like a more organized and centralized version of what they are already doing. My credit cards give me points, the local Japanese fast food restaurant has a frequent buyer program, and grocery stores give me discounts if I agree to give up information about what I eat.
In general, I don't like these games. I am not going to alter my spending habits just to get 250 more BankPoints. If they give me points anyways, I will of course cash them in, but I don't like the feeling of being manipulated by large corporations via a game.
On the other hand, the companies seem to love it. I haven't seen any data, but considering how popular these 'games' are, they must work. And if they work by themselves, imagine how much better they will work when they're consolidated into a a website, which catches on like a fad and all the cool kids use it. Once the cool factor wears off, the industry has already been transformed to run all games on the defacto gaming website (SCVNGR in this case). So there's really no down-side for companies, and customers will think they're getting even better deals than they used to, because now it's just so easy to play games -- rack up points, earn achievements, get discounts.
I don't look forward to the days foretold by Jesse Schell, but it feels inevitable. The people who like playing corporate consumerism games today will be thrilled to take it to the next level on a popular website where companies are constantly trying to drum up more 'fun' (spend more, save more). I'll try it out, like I try out most new tech, but I'm not expecting to have much fun.
At least we know Seth Priebatsch will be having fun.